Poaching, project players, residency qualifications etc.

Continue here about the greatness of NH rugby players, the money the clubs have, the greatness of the SH rugby players and the leak to the north.

Other topic is full

Etc.

Pay them what they’re worth and they’ll stay at home.




The end.

The SH problem is they have to pay their top players to dollar and everyone else pennies cause that's all thats left. The people who have been there awhile get fed up with pennies but the Union don't fell they can pay them the high wages the only pay internationals.

Until the Unions fix their wage policy or find more money the poor NH teams will be able to gut the Super Rugby never mind the rich clubs.

Biltong wrote:Continue here about the greatness of NH rugby players, the money the clubs have, the greatness of the SH rugby players and the leak to the north.

Other topic is full

Etc.

Yeah you just know this will all end in pain, probably our guys when they all dont find their cheque has been mailed. Then we’ll have to accommodate twice the number of professionals as weve had to keep replacing them as fast as they leave. But at least normal service wll be resumed when the NH clubs cant cope with poor playing standards at both club and test level.

The Oracle wrote:Pay them what they’re worth and they’ll stay at home.




The end.

Yeah that will solve it , eh?

Taylorman wrote:

Biltong wrote:Continue here about the greatness of NH rugby players, the money the clubs have, the greatness of the SH rugby players and the leak to the north.

Other topic is full

Etc.

Yeah you just know this will all end in pain, probably our guys when they all dont find their cheque has been mailed. Then we’ll have to accommodate twice the number of professionals as weve had to keep replacing them as fast as they leave. But at least normal service wll be resumed when the NH clubs cant cope with poor playing standards at both club and test level.

Only problem with that is that you forget that the Clubs in England and France work on a different purpose to Union run teams. They are in it to win pure and simple. As long as the SH produce great players they will be hired by these clubs because they want the best in order to win.

Biggest improvement in the NH has been knowledge given from SH players to the younger players. Has lead to big improvements in standards. This knowledge is lost to the SH.

Pay them better and fix the joke of a 'competition' that they have to play in. Brumbies qualified for the quarter finals despite finishing 9th last year. Lions avoided I believe Hurricanes, Highlanders, Crusaders and the Chiefs during the regular season. Refs encouraged to prevent defences competing at the breakdown to bump up scoring. Super Rugby is the equivalent of a PGA tour birdy fest.

Pay them better and fix the joke of a 'competition' that they have to play in. Brumbies qualified for the quarter finals despite finishing 9th last year. Lions avoided I believe Hurricanes, Highlanders, Crusaders and the Chiefs during the regular season. Refs encouraged to prevent defences competing at the breakdown to bump up scoring. Super Rugby is the equivalent of a PGA tour birdy fest.

Engine#4 wrote:Pay them better and fix the joke of a 'competition' that they have to play in. Brumbies qualified for the quarter finals despite finishing 9th last year. Lions avoided I believe Hurricanes, Highlanders, Crusaders and the Chiefs during the regular season. Refs encouraged to prevent defences competing at the breakdown to bump up scoring. Super Rugby is the equivalent of a PGA tour birdy fest.

Trouble with that is the format was a lame attempt to earn more by ensuring as many home games were secured across the board. That isnt helped by the strength of the NZ sides and the larger impact of the overseas pull by the north. ‘Why try and beat the Crusaders when you can thrash Bath off the back of others.

Somethings gotta give and so far it SH super and test sides with no titles and a dropping in the rankings.

Its the toughest non test tournament, only the north wanted a piece of it, so bought half of it up.

Keep in mind too that there are 15 super rugby teams Vs 40 top flight European teams. The European teams have a longer season with more matches so they need a bigger squad of players than the average super rugby squad.


The European game was far behind the SH game about a decade ago. Since then there's been a big knowledge transfer north which has speeded up rugby development in Europe. The technical ability of players have improved in the last 5 years especially.

Engine#4 wrote:Pay them better and fix the joke of a 'competition' that they have to play in. Brumbies qualified for the quarter finals despite finishing 9th last year. Lions avoided I believe Hurricanes, Highlanders, Crusaders and the Chiefs during the regular season. Refs encouraged to prevent defences competing at the breakdown to bump up scoring. Super Rugby is the equivalent of a PGA tour birdy fest.

As far as ridiculous comments go this must be in the top ten.

Do you think SANZAAR is not trying to fix issues such as more pay, less travel, more profits?

You come up with a solution to teams spanning 16 plus time zones, 12-14 hour flights, fournations each with their own set of circumstances.

If the solutions were that obvious they would have fixed this joke of a competition long ago.

You forget the six nations between them have a GDP four times that of SANZAAR and a similar ratio in population with travel at worst a couple of hours.

As a very proud Welshman and British man, I will say, in all honesty, that the way the home nations cap players from other countries without any iota of shame, is, to put it quite bluntly , embarrassing.

I am Welsh, I would only want to represent my country, I would not even consider myself anything else other than Welsh, its a farce.

I remember only to well the impact of losing players, when a whole generation of Welsh players swapped codes to play rugby league, it crippled Welsh rugby and set us back years. There was a time, where I would fear reading the news, as every week a certain player would be making headlines switching codes, I can only sympathise with our SH counterparts.

What I do not understand is, why the home nations cannot do better with what they have ?

We do not see swathes of British & Irish players going to ply their trade in South Africa, New Zealand or Australia to then hopefully get a chance of playing for them, no, they make the best with what they have.

I have no problem with players coming up here to make a living, heck, I want to see the best players on a regular basis, and even for the teams I support, but to then be picked for the country is a joke.

Also, I have a massive problem with the way unions will go looking for players around the world who could potentially represent their country, the work and resources that must get put into that could be spent on developing players from within.

Also, for anyone to say that their country is squeaky clean with regards to this, like on another thread I was debating this subject smacks of delusion. The home nations are without doubt a massive problem when it comes to this. They should show more morality.

LordDowlais wrote:As a very proud Welshman and British man, I will say, in all honesty, that the way the home nations cap players from other countries without any iota of shame, is, to put it quite bluntly , embarrassing.

I am Welsh, I would only want to represent my country, I would not even consider myself anything else other than Welsh, its a farce.

I remember only to well the impact of losing players, when a whole generation of Welsh players swapped codes to play rugby league, it crippled Welsh rugby and set us back years. There was a time, where I would fear reading the news, as every week a certain player would be making headlines switching codes, I can only sympathise with our SH counterparts.

What I do not understand is, why the home nations cannot do better with what they have ?

We do not see swathes of British & Irish players going to ply their trade in South Africa, New Zealand or Australia to then hopefully get a chance of playing for them, no, they make the best with what they have.

I have no problem with players coming up here to make a living, heck, I want to see the best players on a regular basis, and even for the teams I support, but to then be picked for the country is a joke.

Also, I have a massive problem with the way unions will go looking for players around the world who could potentially represent their country, the work and resources that must get put into that could be spent on developing players from within.

Also, for anyone to say that their country is squeaky clean with regards to this, like on another thread I was debating this subject smacks of delusion. The home nations are without doubt a massive problem when it comes to this. They should show more morality.

Couldn't agree more. In this modern society we live in morality is not big on the agenda. Time to re evaluate our values, not everything needs to be dominated by the almighty dollar

As I stated on the other thread if your problem lord is the fact that unions go looking all over the world as you say you have no issue with england as that doesn't happen.

profitius wrote:Keep in mind too that there are 15 super rugby teams Vs 40 top flight European teams. The European teams have a longer season with more matches so they need a bigger squad of players than the average super rugby squad.


The European game was far behind the SH game about a decade ago. Since then there's been a big knowledge transfer north which has speeded up rugby development in Europe. The technical ability of players have improved in the last 5 years especially.

Depends what you call the European game. Which players within the European game?

Its always all about relativity. Remove all SH originated players coaches and support staff right now and allow them to be available for the SH sides and your club support would plummet, you test sides rocket down the rankings, and would remain there for years.

The only reason you have 40 teams is for that reason so your structure is hugely flawed, reliant on massive IP and resources to this day.

No 7&1/2 wrote:As I stated on the other thread if your problem lord is the fact that unions go looking all over the world as you say you have no issue with england as that doesn't happen.

You are deluded.

The clubs pick the players up, then encourage them to become EQ so that they can reap the benefits from the English system.

You have a delusional outlook on this, with the resources England have, you should never be needing to cap the likes of Barritt and Hughes. Yet after Scotland, England are probably the worst for capping SH players over the years.

You see that's where your wording needs to be specific an where you're getting confused. It's up to clubs to sign players the rfu have nothing to do with it whatsoever. As i pointed out on the previous thread prior to you mentioning it that could become a duble edged sword for clubs as they may be able to pick up money for some residency English qualified players but they really don't want them to be capped and lose them in the vast majority of cases!

You also need to ensure you know what you're focusing on as well however this topic seemed to be about residency players rather than those qualifying through lineage.

Again as mentioned in the other topic I have no idea what the amount of residency qualified players for England is compared to other countries in the world. When questioned you didn't either so by repeating that claim do you actually know the numbers now or are you making it up?

No 7&1/2 wrote:As I stated on the other thread if your problem lord is the fact that unions go looking all over the world as you say you have no issue with england as that doesn't happen.

Yes Shields is only a figment of Jones imagination.

Look at the current Scotland squad:-

Simon Berghan – prop – born in New Zealand – Grandparent
WP Nel – prop – born in South Africa – Residency (2015)
Ben Toolis – lock – born in Australia – Parent
John Barclay – flanker – born in Hong Kong – Parent
Cornell du Preez – number 8 – born in South Africa – Residency (2016)
Phil Burleigh – centre – born in New Zealand – Residency (2017)
Nick Grigg – centre – born in New Zealand – Grandparent
Byron McGuigan – winger – born in South Africa – Parent
Tommy Seymour – winger – born in the USA – Mother

LordDowlais wrote:Look at the current Scotland squad:-

Simon Berghan – prop – born in New Zealand – Grandparent
WP Nel – prop – born in South Africa – Residency (2015)
Ben Toolis – lock – born in Australia – Parent    
John Barclay – flanker – born in Hong Kong – Parent
Cornell du Preez – number 8 – born in South Africa – Residency (2016)
Phil Burleigh – centre – born in New Zealand – Residency (2017)
Nick Grigg – centre – born in New Zealand – Grandparent
Byron McGuigan – winger – born in South Africa – Parent
Tommy Seymour – winger – born in the USA – Mother

That is almost better representation than our quota system

No 7&1/2 wrote:You see that's where your wording needs to be specific an where you're getting confused. It's up to clubs to sign players the rfu have nothing to do with it whatsoever. As i pointed out on the previous thread prior to you mentioning it that could become a duble edged sword for clubs as they may be able to pick up money for some residency English qualified players but they really don't want them to be capped and lose them in the vast majority of cases!

You also need to ensure you know what you're focusing on as well however this topic seemed to be about residency players rather than those qualifying through lineage.

Again as mentioned in the other topic I have no idea what the amount of residency qualified players for England is compared to other countries in the world. When questioned you didn't either so by repeating that claim do you actually know the numbers now or are you making it up?

I am focusing on what the title of this topic is. It's you who always seems to squirm and meander your way around the truth. Clubs encouraging players to not be capped at an early age does happen in England, we have all seen it where young Welsh players turn down a call up to the Wales U20's because of it, as they do not want to be tied to Wales at a young age when they are breaking into the 1st team in England.

Taylor that's where again people have to be precise. It appeared that people had an issue with residency. If you have a problem with lineage fair enough.

So for you lord the topic rather than focusing on residency players is actually about any dual.or even.multiple qualifying player. It's good to set that out early to avoid misunderstanding that you yourself had in previous threads. The issue then of course is how you create a set of rules whoch ticks the box of every instance that will arise. It's practically impossible.

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:As I stated on the other thread if your problem lord is the fact that unions go looking all over the world as you say you have no issue with england as that doesn't happen.

You are deluded.

The clubs pick the players up, then encourage them to become EQ so that they can reap the benefits from the English system.

You have a delusional outlook on this, with the resources England have, you should never be needing to cap the likes of Barritt and Hughes. Yet after Scotland, England are probably the worst for capping SH players over the years.

Still hoping to see an English pre-game haka or equivalent at some stage from the Pacific Englanders

Why would the england team do a haka ebop? You seemed unable to answer previously?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Why would the england team do a haka ebop? You seemed unable to answer previously?

He's being sarcastic. It's probably lost on you though.

It was lost on me. Thought he had a relevant point to make but looks like he hasn't. Again.

LordDowlais wrote:Look at the current Scotland squad:-

Simon Berghan – prop – born in New Zealand – Grandparent
WP Nel – prop – born in South Africa – Residency (2015)
Ben Toolis – lock – born in Australia – Parent    
John Barclay – flanker – born in Hong Kong – Parent
Cornell du Preez – number 8 – born in South Africa – Residency (2016)
Phil Burleigh – centre – born in New Zealand – Residency (2017)
Nick Grigg – centre – born in New Zealand – Grandparent
Byron McGuigan – winger – born in South Africa – Parent
Tommy Seymour – winger – born in the USA – Mother

Without wishing to be pedantic, 4 of those players: Barclay, CDP, Burleigh and Grigg are not in the current Scotland squad!

It's a strange one when 'poaching' for some is picking someone who has always qualified for that nation.if that's the case you will simply never stop it and frankly people shouldn't be trying to.
The rfu did recently try to bring through a stronger rule to better compensate unions who have put in effort and money in developing players. Didn't get much support at all.

BigGee wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:Look at the current Scotland squad:-

Simon Berghan – prop – born in New Zealand – Grandparent
WP Nel – prop – born in South Africa – Residency (2015)
Ben Toolis – lock – born in Australia – Parent    
John Barclay – flanker – born in Hong Kong – Parent
Cornell du Preez – number 8 – born in South Africa – Residency (2016)
Phil Burleigh – centre – born in New Zealand – Residency (2017)
Nick Grigg – centre – born in New Zealand – Grandparent
Byron McGuigan – winger – born in South Africa – Parent
Tommy Seymour – winger – born in the USA – Mother

Without wishing to be pedantic, 4 of those players: Barclay, CDP, Burleigh and Grigg are not in the current Scotland squad!

Yes, I do apologise, I noticed that after I posted it, but they have all been capped at one point and are now only eligible for Scotland. Also, I think I am being a bit harsh on Barclay, I would wager that the none of the rest of them grew up hoping to represent Scotland.

I must admit I don’t like SH players being shoehorned in to the national side, although it must be said in England’s case currently  it’s a SH manager who seems to want to drag them in fresh of the boat, and so far it doesn’t seem to have worked.

Of course there’s the other side of the coin.

Let’s say that the various rugby unions all grow a set of balls and follow the example of a few of the unions – absolutely no (none whatsoever – no ‘exceptions’) international selection if you play in a foreign based league/competition.

That’s grand for those unions who have a domestic league, but what about those nations who don’t have a league system? Their international side will go down the pan very quickly and create an even bigger differentiation to the haves and have nots. What choice are you then offering a good class player from Samoa, Fijia, Tonga, Romania, Georgia and all of the other ‘second tier’ nations for a decent career?

Additionally this debate is infringing on the right of people to earn a livelihood. Can you imagine the uproar if one of the commercial sectors – as an example let’s say the Financial Sector - decided to impose a strict selection process based on where you were born?

There would be bloody hell on and much gnashing of teeth as the non-nationals were booted out of the few countries who have large financial sectors and sent back home to do a similar job for a third of the pay. For us to sit back in our armchairs and impose restrictive employment laws on fellow humans (just because they play rugby) reeks of hypocrisy.  

And don’t think for one minute that this is purely a SH/NH problem, my team the Falcons also have suffered from a similar drain of players to bigger clubs and if you then turn back the pages to before they were formed, the club they morphed from -  Gosforth – was a reasonably successful provincial side because they hoovered up all of the decent talent from the North East, Gosforth loved themselves and considered themselves the representatives of the NE but they were cordially hated by their ‘feeder’ clubs who in some cases had longer histories. It took me a long time to swallow that bitter pill and start supporting them and I'm still not too happy with their away strip - Green and White which was Gosforth's colours.

Player drain is nothing new. I’m not sure what the answer is but just remember that rugby players are not pixels, they are real people with mortgages and aspirations for themselves and their family, so just think on – would you like to ply your personal ife in a restrictive labour market?

TrailApe wrote:Player drain is nothing new. I’m not sure what the answer is but just remember that rugby players are not pixels, they are real people with mortgages and aspirations for themselves and their family, so just think on – would you like to ply your personal ife in a restrictive labour market?

I do not think anybody is suggesting this. I have even said, I like seeing these players playing up here, it's when, all of a sudden, they change their allegience to another country and the country courting them has no shame, as does the player himself, is when I get the problem.

Look, if player A was born in New Zealand, but he came to the UK at a young age with his parents, then I think he has every right to play for the country he has lived in most of his life.

But when a player is tapped on the back, and told hey, do you know you have a Welsh/English/Scottish/Irish grandparent, you can come and play for us, or when somebody has played here for a few years and qualified, I do not like it. These players do not grow up dreaming of putting on the Welsh or any other home nation jersey.

As good as Hadleigh Parkes is, do you reckon, when he started playing rugby he thought, I really want to represent Wales ? No, he wanted to be an All Black. He did not get that dream, so now he is playing for Wales.

I do not like it.

I have even said, I like seeing these players playing up here, it's when, all of a sudden, they change their allegience to another country and the country courting them has no shame, as does the player himself, is when I get the problem.

I sort of agree but if player X can make more money (direct wages, potential wages and endorsements) by playing at an international level for a country he wasn’t born in then that player must be barking mad to miss out on that chance. It’s a very short career and they must maximise they’re earnings.

I don’t go to work for fun – I go there for beer tokens and future beer tokens (pension). If I was given an opportunity to boost my wages (and put me in the shop window for possibly better offers) by working on a weekend once in a while for the ‘overseas-branch’ of a bigger firm and didn’t take advantage of that opportunity then I would be letting myself and my family down.

How do you reduce the flip-flop allegiances at International level?

I suppose you could make playing for a country a non-profit thing, you get paid for expenses and the reward is the shirt. But unfortunately Internationals are just not friendlies anymore, a lot of money is riding on success so how long would it take for ‘boot-money’ to creep in as  the Unions try to encourage players to turn up for the national side for an expenses only remuneration scheme.

And even then players will still migrate to the countries where they can make a better living, settle, have kids and the kids will play for the ‘foreign’ country, so the talent creep is still happening, it’s just more insidious.

My family were a bit of a wondering family.

My Father grew up in Twickenham so played rugby in School so he loved rugby so I now love rugby. He is one of the most anti English I know because his grandfather was Irish who joined the army and so he was always told he was Irish living in England.

I have a brother born in England move at 8 to Wales and played under 11 & 12 in Llanelli. Moved at 12 to Ireland and took up GAA. He always views himself Irish

I am born in Ireland but only love Rugby because of my English father.

Each case is never as simple as born in a country you are that country.

Brendan wrote:My family were a bit of a wondering family.

My Father grew up in Twickenham so played rugby in School so he loved rugby so I now love rugby.  He is one of the most anti English I know because his grandfather was Irish who joined the army and so he was always told he was Irish living in England.

I have a brother born in England move at 8 to Wales and played under 11 & 12 in Llanelli.  Moved at 12 to Ireland and took up GAA.  He always views himself Irish

I am born in Ireland but only love Rugby because of my English father.

Each case is never as simple as born in a country you are that country.

Agree, it isn't that simple ever.

Each case is unique, yet there should be a quite clearly defining line of what LD is talking about.

Where did a person grow up, what influenced him to lay a sport, who influenced him to play a sport, who did he want to represnt when he learned to love a sport.

How many of these "newly adopted countries" were in the dreams of these players?

Biltong wrote:

The Oracle wrote:Pay them what they’re worth and they’ll stay at home.




The end.

Yeah  that will solve it , eh?

Yes it largely will solve it. Percy Montgomery didn't come to war torn Newport for the scenery and lifestyle.

And how can you realistically capture that in a succinct world rugby rule? It's impossible.

The poaching thing seems to come down to a few things.

1. When does rugby start in a players life, before they play, school, professional contract. It seems that people want to pick this according what suits them. If you as a child in one country and a teenager and adulthood in another which country owns you. This would include Carby and Tuilgi who I don't think have said they don't feel English/Irish

2. Your parents are earning money with a job in another country and plan to go home and raise their kids as from their home country. I doubt ROG has his kids raised anything other than they are from Cork. I also am sure he is from Cork in his mind.

3. There are 70m Irish met loads in the states

No 7&1/2 wrote:And how can you realistically capture that in a succinct world rugby rule? It's impossible.

The current rules are fine. Most people that have problems with the rules are just upset the NH has finally caught up. Plus it's not like any of the project players were going to make it at home.

Didn't they use to say it took a year or two to reteach players in the SH after they came back from the NH so all these overseas players would be rubbish if the were eligible.

A rule could be brought in that you have to stay with the Union who gave you your professional contract but then we would hear how unfair it is that player X is better than player Y but gets paid pennies.

Or at 20 ever play must put down what unions they will represent if allowed

True enough Brendan. Used to think the grandparents rule was the sticking point but on this thread even parents is too far back for some!

No 7&1/2 wrote:True enough Brendan. Used to think the grandparents rule was the sticking point but on this thread even parents is too far back for some!

The reality is only the home nations benefit from this rule.

The Oracle wrote:

Biltong wrote:

The Oracle wrote:Pay them what they’re worth and they’ll stay at home.




The end.

Yeah  that will solve it , eh?

Yes it largely will solve it.  Percy Montgomery didn't come to war torn Newport for the scenery and lifestyle.  

Like I responded to another comment relating the same thought.

Provide us the solution of ZANZAAR making more profits which can pay higher slaries, and reduce the cost and everything else that impact 16 time zones.

Compare that the the close proxmity of the Six Nations and their collective GDP and vast populations.

That's not true is it Biltong. I'm assuming you mean the wider set of rules so residency grandparents and parents and if that's the case as you expressed it's possibly only argentina who are exempt? But that's a complete guess.

No 7&1/2 wrote:That's not true is it Biltong. I'm assuming you mean the wider set of rules so residency grandparents and parents and if that's the case as you expressed it's possibly only argentina who are exempt? But that's a complete guess.

Well, how many European players with ancestry to the SH play for New Zeland, Australia and South Africa?

Not a clue but of course the world is wider than the countries you've mentioned.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Not a clue but of course the world is wider than the countries you've mentioned.

You're avoiding the issue.

I can tell you I know of not one European that represented SA in the Pro Era, There might have been one or two for Australia but on NZ I don't know, but doubt it.

Compare that to how many SANZAAR players have represented the Six Nations.

That ratio will be significantly skewed

Yeah you're probably correct on that. SA has still used the rule to cap players though.

Well, how many European players with ancestry to the SH play for New Zeland, Australia and South Africa?

Quite a few I would guess - they left Europe to get a better life - economic migrants - so their grandchildren are coming back to Europe for a better life (economic migrants) I can't see much difference.

Compare that to how many SANZAAR players have represented the Six Nations

If you are any good as a European player you stay in Europe - who wants a pay cut?

I believe the only current capped England player in or around the squad who have qualified by residency as an adult player is Hughes. There are a couple more uncapped players on the fringes (Rhodes, Schonert) and further out there is Roko. Everybody else is either English, has a family link, or came here as a child.

Considering the number of Welsh players who could also qualify for England I am not sure why LD is getting so wound up.

lostinwales wrote:Considering the number of Welsh players who could also qualify for England I am not sure why LD is getting so wound up.

I'm not getting wound up. What a stupid thing to suggest.